Skip to content

R
riscv-gcc-1
Commit 7dd4ba48 by Loren J. Rittle Committed by Loren J. Rittle
Options

howto.html (Thread-safety): Rename section to ``The Standard C++ library and… 

howto.html (Thread-safety): Rename section to ``The Standard C++ library and multithreading'' and update...

        * docs/html/17_intro/howto.html (Thread-safety): Rename
        section to ``The Standard C++ library and multithreading'' and
        update information based on recent mailing list traffic.  Move
        all discussion of __USE_MALLOC to...
        * docs/html/23_containers/howto.html (Containers and multithreading):
        ...here and rework it based on recent mailing list traffic.

From-SVN: r47102
parent 847898f6
Showing with 111 additions and 50 deletions
libstdc++-v3/ChangeLog
2001-11-16 Loren J. Rittle <ljrittle@acm.org>
* docs/html/17_intro/howto.html (Thread-safety): Rename
section to ``The Standard C++ library and multithreading'' and
update information based on recent mailing list traffic. Move
all discussion of __USE_MALLOC to...
* docs/html/23_containers/howto.html (Containers and multithreading):
...here and rework it based on recent mailing list traffic.
2001-11-15 Loren J. Rittle <ljrittle@acm.org>
* docs/html/faq/index.html (Is libstdc++-v3 thread-safe?): Clarify
......
libstdc++-v3/docs/html/17_intro/howto.html
......@@ -25,7 +25,7 @@
<h1>Contents</h1>
<ul>
<li><a href="#2">The Standard C++ header files</a>
<li><a href="#3">Thread-safety</a>
<li><a href="#3">The Standard C++ library and multithreading</a>
<li><a href="#4"><code>&lt;foo&gt;</code> vs <code>&lt;foo.h&gt;</code></a>
<li><a href="porting-howto.html">Porting HOWTO</a>
</ul>
......@@ -50,59 +50,77 @@
</p>
<hr>
<h2><a name="3">Thread-safety</a></h2>
<p>This is a thorny issue that gets brought up on the libstdc++-v3
and gcc mailing lists on a regular basis (probably by a cron job).
This entry will mention a very little bit about the general MT
issues with libstdc++. The latest status and quick notes will be
in FAQ 5.6. Some discussion about thread-safe containers will be
in section 6.8 (the HOWTOs on containers). This section only applies
when gcc and libstdc++-v3 were configured with --enable-threads.
<h2><a name="3">The Standard C++ library and multithreading</a></h2>
<p>This section discusses issues surrounding the proper compilation
of multithreaded applications which use the Standard C++
library. This information is gcc-specific since the C++
standard does not address matters of multithreaded applications.
Unless explicitly prefaced, all information in this section is
current as of the gcc 3.0 release and all later point releases.
</p>
<p>The libstdc++ code (all of it, not just the containers) has been
designed so that thread-safety will be easily possible. The first
(!) problem is finding a <em>fast</em> method of implementation
portable to all platforms. A minor problem that pops up every so
often is different interpretations of what &quot;thread-safe&quot;
means for a library (not a general program). We currently use the
<a href="http://www.sgi.com/tech/stl/thread_safety.html">same
definition that SGI</a> uses for their STL subset.
<em>Please see the many cautions given in
<a href="../23_containers/howto.html">HOWTOs on containers</a>.</em>
<p>Earlier gcc releases had a somewhat different approach to
threading configuration and proper compilation. Before gcc 3.0,
configuration of the threading model was dictated by compiler
command-line options and macros (both of which were somewhat
thread-implementation and port-specific). There were no
guarantees related to being able to link code compiled with one
set of options and macro setting with another set. For gcc 3.0,
configuration of the threading model used with libraries and
user-code is performed when gcc is configured and built using
the --enable-threads and --disable-threads options. The ABI is
stable for symbol name-mangling and limited functional
compatibility exists between code compiled under different
threading models.
</p>
<p>Here is another attempt at explaining the dangers of using the
STL with threading support without understanding some important
details. The STL implementation is currently configured to use
the high-speed caching memory allocator. If you absolutely
think you must change this on a global basis for your platform
to support multi-threading, then please consult all commentary
in include/bits/c++config and the HOWTOs on containers. Be
fully aware that you may change the external or internal ABI of
libstdc++-v3 when you provide -D__USE_MALLOC on the command line
or make a change to that configuration file.
<p>All normal disclaimers aside, multithreaded C++ application are
only supported when libstdc++ and all user code was built with
compilers which report (via <em>gcc/g++ -v</em>) the same thread
model and that model is not <em>single</em>. As long as your
final application is actually single-threaded, then it should be
safe to mix user code built with a thread model of
<em>single</em> with a libstdc++ and other C++ libraries built
with another thread model useful on the platform. Other mixes
may or may not work but are not considered supported. (Thus, if
you distribute a shared C++ library in binary form only, it may
be best to compile it with a gcc configured with
--enable-threads for maximal interchangeability and usefulness
with a user population that may have built gcc with either
--enable-threads or --disable-threads.)
</p>
<p>If you don't like caches of objects being retained inside the STL, then
you might be tempted to define __USE_MALLOC either on the command
line or by rebuilding c++config.h. Please note, once you define
__USE_MALLOC, only the malloc allocator is visible to application code
(i.e. the typically higher-speed allocator is not even available
in this configuration). There is a better way: It is possible
to force the malloc-based allocator on a per-case-basis for some
application code even when the above macro symbol is not defined.
The library team generally believes that this is a better way to tune
an application for high-speed using this implementation of the STL.
Here is one possible example displaying the forcing of the malloc-based
allocator over the typically higher-speed default allocator:
<pre>
std::list &lt;my_type, std::malloc_alloc&gt; my_malloc_based_list;</pre>
<p>When you link a multithreaded application, you will probably
need to add a library or flag to g++. This is a very
non-standardized area of gcc across ports. Some ports support a
special flag (the spelling isn't even standardized yet) to add
all required macros to a compilation (if any such flags are
required then you must provide the flag for all compilations not
just linking) and link-library additions and/or replacements at
link time. The documentation is weak. Here is a quick summary
to display how ad hoc this is: On Solaris, both -pthreads and
-threads (with subtly different meanings) are honored. On OSF,
-pthread and -threads (with subtly different meanings) are
honored. On Linux/i386, -pthread is honored. On FreeBSD,
-pthread is honored. Some other ports use other switches.
AFAIK, none of this is properly documented anywhere other than
in ``gcc -dumpspecs'' (look at lib and cpp entries).
</p>
<p>A recent journal article has described &quot;atomic integer
operations,&quot; which would allow us to, well, perform updates
on integers atomically, and without requiring an explicit mutex
lock. This appears promising, but the major difficulty is that
these operations &quot;may not be available on all systems, and
if they are, may have different interfaces.&quot; [quoting from
mailing list messages]
<p>See <a href="../faq/index.html#3">FAQ</a> (general overview), <a
href="../23_containers/howto.html#3">23</a> (containers), and <a
href="../27_io/howto.html#9">27</a> (I/O) for more information.
</p>
<p>The libstdc++-v3 library (unlike libstdc++-v2, all of it, not
just the STL) has been designed so that multithreaded
applications using it may be written. The first problem is
finding a <em>fast</em> method of implementation portable to all
platforms. Due to historical reasons, some of the library is
written against per-CPU-architecture spinlocks and other parts
against the gthr.h abstraction layer which is provided by gcc.
A minor problem that pops up every so often is different
interpretations of what &quot;thread-safe&quot; means for a
library (not a general program). We currently use the <a
href="http://www.sgi.com/tech/stl/thread_safety.html">same
definition that SGI</a> uses for their STL subset. However, the
exception for read-only containers only applies to the STL
components.
</p>
<p>Here is a small link farm to threads (no pun) in the mail archives
that discuss the threading problem. Each link is to the first
......
libstdc++-v3/docs/html/23_containers/howto.html
......@@ -242,6 +242,40 @@
mechanism. Trying to provide a catch-all general template
solution would probably be more trouble than it's worth.
</p>
<p>The STL implementation is currently configured to use the
high-speed caching memory allocator. If you absolutely think
you must change this on a global basis for your platform to
better support multi-threading, then please consult all
commentary in include/bits/c++config. (Explicit warning since
so many people post after getting confused while attempting
this:) Adding -D__USE_MALLOC on the command line is not a good
idea. Related to threading or otherwise, the current
recommendation is that users not add any macro defines on the
command line to enable features out of libstdc++-v3. There is
no condition under which it will help you without causing other
issues to perhaps raise up (possible linkage/ABI problems). In
particular, __USE_MALLOC should only be added to a libstdc++-v3
configuration file, include/bits/c++config (where such user
action is cautioned against), and the entire library should be
rebuilt. If you do not, then you might be violating the
one-definition rule of C/C++ and you might cause yourself untold
problems. If you find any platform where gcc reports a
threading model other than single and where libstdc++-v3 builds
a buggy container allocator when used with threads unless you
define __USE_MALLOC, we want to hear about it ASAP. In the
past, correctness was the main reason people were led to believe
that they should define __USE_MALLOC when using threads.
</p>
<p>There is a better way (not standardized yet): It is possible to
force the malloc-based allocator on a per-case-basis for some
application code. The library team generally believes that this
is a better way to tune an application for high-speed using this
implementation of the STL. Here is one possible example
displaying the forcing of the malloc-based allocator over the
typically higher-speed default allocator:
<pre>
std::list &lt;my_type, std::__malloc_alloc_template&lt;0&gt; &gt; my_malloc_based_list;</pre>
</p>
<p>Return <a href="#top">to top of page</a> or
<a href="../faq/index.html">to the FAQ</a>.
</p>
......
Markdown is supported
0% or
You are about to add 0 people to the discussion. Proceed with caution.
Finish editing this message first!
Please register or to comment